18313 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Now, Mrs. Ramsey,14 you -- are you aware, I should say, that15 your paint kit was found very close to the16 wine cellar door?17 A. I have heard that.18 Q. Did you recall at any time that19 you were shown photographs in that regard?20 A. No.21 Q. We have found, and I want you to22 help us, maybe you can offer an explanation23 for this. We have found fibers in the paint24 tray that appear to come off of the coat in25 the photograph we showed you.

184 1 A. In the paint tray? 2 Q. Yes. 3 A. What's a paint -- 4 MR. WOOD: Hold on. Let him ask 5 you his question and then answer his 6 question. What is your question? 7 MR. LEVIN: I did. 8 MR. WOOD: You got your answer? 9 MR. LEVIN: Well, I got, she said10 what's a paint tray.11 MR. WOOD: No, she didn't. She 12 was following your question, in the paint13 tray because you said we have found, and I14 want you to help us, maybe you can offer an15 explanation for this. We have found fibers16 in the paint tray that appear to come off of17 the coat in the photograph we showed you. 18 What is the question?19 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Can you explain20 for us how the fibers from the coat got in21 the paint tray?22 MR. WOOD: Are you stipulating as23 a fact that the fibers that you say are in24 the paint tray, in fact, came from that coat25 that we earlier discussed, or is it simply a

185 1 matter that you say they may have? Because 2 I am not going to let her answer 3 argumentative, hypothetical opinions. I will 4 let her answer if you are going to state it 5 as a matter of fact that that fiber came 6 from that jacket. 7 MR. LEVIN: I can state to you, 8 Mr. Wood, that, given the current state of 9 the scientific examination of fibers, that,10 based on the state of the art technology,11 that I believe, based on testing, that fibers12 from your client's coat are in the paint13 tray.14 MR. WOOD: Are you stating as a15 fact that they are from the coat or is it16 consistent with? What is the test result17 terminology? Is it conclusive? I mean, I18 think she is entitled to know that when you19 ask her to explain something.20 MR. KANE: It is identical in all21 scientific respects.22 MR. WOOD: What does that mean? 23 Are you telling me it is conclusive?24 MR. KANE: It is identical.25 MR. WOOD: Are you saying it is

186 1 a conclusive match? 2 MR. KANE: You can draw your own 3 conclusions. 4 MR. WOOD: I am not going to 5 draw my own conclusions. 6 MR. KANE: I am saying it is 7 identical. 8 MR. WOOD: Well, what you are 9 saying in terms of how you interpret a lab10 result may or may not be the lab result. 11 If you have it, let's see it. I would be12 glad to let her answer a question about it,13 but I don't want to go into the area of14 where we are dealing with someone's15 interpretation of something that may not be a16 fact and have her explain something because17 she can't explain something that might be18 someone's opinion or someone's interpretation.19 She can try to answer something20 if you are stating it as a matter of fact.21 MR. LEVIN: Well, I believe that22 Mr. Kane's statement is accurate as to what23 the examiner would testify to.24 MR. WOOD: Will he testify that25 it is a conclusive match?

187 1 MR. KANE: Yes. 2 MR. WOOD: Everybody is -- you 3 all want to take a minute and confer on 4 that? 5 MR. KANE: No. 6 MR. WOOD: Because I want to make 7 sure, if I am going to let her answer this, 8 that you are representing and stipulating 9 that it is a conclusive match.10 MR. KANE: Well, come on, Lin, we11 have been around a long time. You know, you12 know exactly what I am saying.13 MR. WOOD: No, I don't. I14 honestly do not.15 MR. KANE: Well, I am telling16 you, it is -- is it conclusive in the sense17 that, that there is something unique about it18 that could only come from a particular item,19 then the answer is no. 20 Is it that it is identical in all21 respects to the fibers off of the jacket,22 then the answer is yes.23 Now, does that mean it is24 conclusive?25 MR. WOOD: It doesn't sound like

188 1 it to me. 2 MR. KANE: Then you have got your 3 answer. 4 MR. WOOD: It sounds like to 5 me -- 6 MR. KANE: Then you have your 7 answer. 8 MR. WOOD: Then it is a matter 9 of opinion. It is not a matter of fact.10 MR. KANE: Then you have your11 answer.12 MR. WOOD: I want to make sure,13 because this is an area that you are asking14 her to explain something that may or may not15 be a fact because you are representing to16 her, Ms. Ramsey, a fiber from your red and17 black and gray jacket was found in the paint18 tray, how do you explain it.19 I mean, if it is a matter of20 fact, I will let her answer that.21 MR. LEVIN: Well, Mr. Wood, let22 me -- I thought I made it as clear as23 possible. I will try to clarify for you.24 I assume that, in your practice,25 that you have dealt with --

189 1 MR. WOOD: Don't assume anything 2 about my practice. I am asking you a 3 question. You used the term in your 4 question, Mr. Levin, you used the term in 5 your question, and I am sure that you have 6 precisely framed your questions. You said 7 appears. 8 Now, "appears to be" and "is," in 9 my practice, are two different things. I10 want to make very clear what the question is11 before I let her answer. That is all I am12 asking.13 MR. LEVIN: Given -- and I want14 to answer your question. I am going to try15 to answer your question before I phrase it16 to your client.17 Given the status of fiber18 analysis, the state of the art, that fiber19 is identical in all respects to fibers from20 your client's coat; however, as is the case21 with any type of scientific evidence, even22 DNA evidence, where you get numbers that say,23 for example, the likelihood of a random match24 would be 1 in, say, 14 trillion. An expert25 is not going to get up, they'll talk about

190 1 numbers, but they are not going to get up 2 and say that that is the DNA from that man. 3 MR. WOOD: Maybe you should give 4 us the numbers on this fiber. 5 MR. LEVIN: There are no numbers 6 on the fiber. 7 MR. WOOD: Give us that, whatever 8 you got, and we will look at it. 9 MR. LEVIN: Do you understand10 what I'm saying? I don't want to, I don't11 want to mislead you because scientific12 evidence is always subject to --13 MR. WOOD: That's why I don't14 think she should be put into the position of15 explaining something that scientists may16 differ on.17 MR. LEVIN: Well, scientists will18 differ on many, many things.19 MR. WOOD: Well, then -- that is20 my point. She shouldn't be explaining21 something that one person may say this22 appears to be the case and the other person23 may say no, it doesn't appear to be the24 case. You are putting her in an incredibly25 awkward situation.

191 1 CHIEF BECKNER: Let me try to 2 offer a compromise. 3 MR. WOOD: We are ready to hear 4 it. 5 CHIEF BECKNER: Instead of wording 6 the question in terms of fibers from the 7 jacket or appear to be from the jacket, 8 maybe if you word it fibers that by 9 scientific analysis are identical to fibers10 from the jacket and not say, not identify11 those fibers from the jacket but say12 identical to fibers --13 MR. WOOD: What if we left out14 the fiber problem altogether and just simply15 ask her whether or not she ever had the16 jacket, the red and black, gray jacket in17 the proximity of the paint tray. We don't18 have to fight the question of what the fiber19 is or isn't. Isn't that what you really20 want to find out?21 CHIEF BECKNER: Well, I think22 that is probably what Bruce and Mike were23 trying to get to is is there an explanation.24 MR. WOOD: Well, but again, I am25 not trying to prevent there from being an

192 1 explanation as to the question of the jacket 2 in proximity to the paint tray, but I am 3 very much concerned about her trying to 4 explain something that may or may not be the 5 case scientifically based on opinion. 6 MR. LEVIN: I will rephrase the 7 question and maybe this will satisfy you. 8 MR. WOOD: Okay. 9 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Mrs. Ramsey, I10 have scientific evidence from forensic11 scientists that say that there's fibers in12 the paint tray that match your red jacket. 13 I have no evidence from any scientist to14 suggest that those fibers are from any source15 other than your red jacket.16 MR. WOOD: Well, you can't ask17 her -- Come on. What other sources did they18 test? How many other red jackets and red19 and black jackets did they test? That is an20 unfair question on the face of it, Bruce. 21 Did they test anything other than that red22 and black jacket?23 I mean, they can't have24 information that it could come from another25 source if they didn't test another source,

193 1 for gosh sakes. So, I mean, that doesn't 2 help solve the dilemma. 3 I think what you want to know is, 4 you suspect, apparently, for whatever reason, 5 that there may be a match or there may be a 6 fiber from her red and black jacket that was 7 on the paint -- in the paint tray, but we 8 are not at all clear whether that is a fact 9 or whether that's just something that you10 believe may or may not be the case.11 MR. LEVIN: Well, I told you in12 the question and I told you face-to-face13 that, given the most sophisticated testing14 available at this time, there is fiber15 evidence in that paint tray that matches.16 MR. WOOD: Then fairly we would17 like to see that evidence so we can then let18 her answer it so she can fairly know what19 the actual results are.20 I think that is a fair request.21 MR. LEVIN: Whether it is her22 fiber or not, I mean, if she can say I23 can't explain it, I can't explain it, it24 doesn't matter what the test says.25 MR. WOOD: No, no, I think it

194 1 would be fair for her to be able to 2 recognize the question of whether this is 3 something that she even has to explain. 4 MR. MORRISSEY: Lin. 5 MR. WOOD: You know, a red fiber 6 can be in a paint tray from any number of 7 sources. I mean, we don't, you are asking, 8 specifically you are trying to attach 9 apparently a red fiber, I take it from her10 jacket to the paint tray.11 MR. MORRISSEY: Lin, if we charge12 an intruder in this case, this is a question13 that is going to get asked her.14 MR. WOOD: Well, I mean, but15 you're going to be able, that intruder's16 defense lawyer is going to have the benefit17 of knowing what result, the test result that18 you are looking at; true? So why shouldn't19 Pat --20 MR. MORRISSEY: And he is going21 to be asking her this very same question.22 MR. WOOD: Wouldn't that person23 have the benefit of knowing your test result?24 MR. MORRISSEY: Exactly.25 MR. WOOD: And I think Patsy

195 1 ought to have the benefit too because I am 2 not going to let her speculate, and I don't 3 think you want her to speculate, that is all 4 I am saying. We will let her answer the 5 question, but I would like for her to fairly 6 know exactly what the factual underpinning is 7 or even if it is a factual underpinning or 8 whether it is a disputed issue in the case. 9 And then if you all -- why don't10 we tag that and come back to it maybe after11 lunch and let me think about it a little bit12 and then you all think about it. And then13 maybe after, we will resolve it, I think, in14 a way that gets you the information that you15 want.16 MR. MORRISSEY: The problem is,17 even if it is somewhat in dispute, it is18 going to get asked. I mean, a judge is,19 would, would allow that. And, and these are20 questions, these kinds of questions are the21 things we need to know the answer to if we22 are confronted with a scenario where we have23 to put Mrs. Ramsey on the witness stand and24 subject her to, explain to us how is it that25 fibers that are identified back to your,

196 1 quote, coat as the source. Now, you know -- 2 MR. WOOD: But her answer may be, 3 you know, did you check anything else? 4 MR. MORRISSEY: Well -- 5 MR. WOOD: I mean, you know, the 6 intruder, what was, if you find the intruder 7 and you find clothing there, did you check 8 the intruder's clothing to see if it matches 9 the same, better, or whatever. I mean,10 there are so many hypotheticals there that we11 just have to know what we are talking about,12 in all fairness, Mitch.13 MR. MORRISSEY: But you understand14 the position we are in as far as that is15 going to get asked.16 MR. WOOD: Yeah, but I also17 understand that the body or universe of18 evidence that may be in existence when that19 is asked is totally different than what20 exists here today. We don't even know what21 other items were tested. We don't even know22 what the test results are. And I am just23 very hesitant to have Patsy speculate over24 something that we don't know whether it is25 true or not, we don't know what other things

197 1 were tested, et cetera. 2 That is my dilemma. Let me think 3 about it. We won't take a hard position on 4 it yet, but you all think about it in terms 5 of whether you might be able to can get some 6 additional information on it and we can come 7 back at a later date and answer it or we 8 can do it in a different fashion. 9 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We need to10 make a tape change.11 MR. LEVIN: I think it is a good12 lunch break and you can think about it13 because there are other similar questions, so14 the answer, your decision on this will15 dictate what happens with a series of coming16 questions, just so you know what is coming.17 MR. WOOD: Well, and fairly, I18 anticipated there might be something because,19 I mean, the forensics issue is one that I20 think everyone is aware of, tests that have21 been done subsequent to June of 1998, and I22 just wanted to make sure that we were not23 asking her to answer questions that are based24 on what could be differing opinions on25 forensics --

19810 MR. LEVIN: Yes. Mr. Wood, we11 left off with, I had posed the question to12 Mrs. Ramsey concerning her offering an13 explanation for fiber or fibers found in her14 paint tray. You did not want her to answer15 prior to the break. You wanted some time to16 think about it. I assume that you've had17 that opportunity. So the question now is18 will she answer the question?19 MR. WOOD: Not as phrased. And20 let me explain just quickly why.21 I do not want, nor do I think22 you should expect for Mrs. Ramsey, for Patsy,23 to speculate. Pure speculation is always24 fraught with peril in anybody's part. And25 your question not only calls for, I think,

199 1 gross speculation, but it is at best a 2 hypothetical that reasonably may not even be 3 based on fact. Here is what I would offer 4 in terms of a compromise, and that is, you 5 have indicated, at least by your questions, 6 that you are comfortable in giving us, at 7 least, your verbal statement of the results 8 of these tests. 9 I think, if you would give us,10 subsequent to this or if you want to do it11 today, this afternoon, or tomorrow, you can12 get those, if you can give us the actual13 result, not looking for the details of the14 testing, but just the results, the15 terminology used, we will then consider,16 reconsider, and maybe we can get you some17 additional information.18 But right now as it stands, I am19 just not willing to let Patsy sit here and20 speculate about scenarios that may not, in21 fact, be based in fact. I just don't think22 that is fair.23 MR. LEVIN: Just so you know,24 what I would like to ask her is the25 following, and you will have this in case

200 1 you have a change of heart in the future. 2 MR. WOOD: Okay. 3 MR. LEVIN: I think that is 4 probably fair. Based on the state of the 5 art scientific testing, we believe the fibers 6 from her jacket were found in the paint 7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found 8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket 9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and11 the question is, can she explain to us how12 those fibers appeared in those places that13 are associated with her daughter's death. 14 And I understand you are not going to answer15 those.16 MR. WOOD: Right. Not, not17 without -- I mean, with all due respect,18 Bruce, even the discussion we had, as I can19 best recall it, we didn't get a consistent20 description of the fiber results on the21 question of the paint tray. You are sitting22 here making a record saying that it is a23 fact, and I don't know that.24 MR. LEVIN: I understand that,25 and I'm just --

201 1 MR. WOOD: And I think what we 2 will probably find, more likely than not, is 3 when we look at your test results, we will 4 find that there was -- there were fibers 5 that were consistent with or similar to 6 fibers that you believe were found on Patsy's 7 sweater or jacket. 8 I think we will also find, if you 9 put all of the information out there, that10 there were an extraordinary number of fibers11 that are not, in fact, in any way similar to12 any item associated with Patsy Ramsey on13 these very items. 14 And to single out now in this15 record and say a fiber was found on the16 ligature that was consistent with Patsy17 Ramsey's jacket, fairly, I think if asked,18 you would say, Mr. Wood, there were an19 extraordinary number of other fibers that we20 do not relate in any way to Mrs. Ramsey and21 probably you would tell me you don't have an22 explanation for. 23 So I don't want this record to be24 accusatory based on your statements about the25 fibers. Fiber evidence, as you know, is

202 1 pretty, pretty -- I won't say weak, but 2 let's just say that it is subject to a great 3 amount of debate in the profession. And 4 that is why I am just not comfortable 5 leaving your statements there without, I 6 think, putting a more accurate picture, 7 Bruce, on the whole record. 8 MR. LEVIN: I understand your 9 position.10 In addition to those questions,11 there are some others that I would like you12 to think about whether or not we can have13 Mrs. Ramsey perhaps in the future answer. I14 understand you are advising her not to today,15 and those are there are black fibers that,16 according to our testing that was conducted,17 that match one of the two shirts that was18 provided to us by the Ramseys, black shirt.19 Those are located in the20 underpants of JonBenet Ramsey, were found in21 her crotch area, and I believe those are two22 other areas that we have intended to ask23 Mrs. Ramsey about if she could help us in24 explaining their presence in those locations.25 MR. WOOD: And again, you state

203 1 that on this record as fact, and I really 2 think that is unfair. I think if you would 3 produce the full truth of the fibers that 4 you have collected that it would probably be 5 at best similar to, which is not uncommon. 6 And I think you would also probably have to 7 admit that there are any number of other 8 fibers found in these areas that you have no 9 explanation for, and I don't want this record10 to be distorted down the road as being a11 situation where somehow there is greater12 weight given to these similar fibers you13 represent in terms of their location and14 their alleged origin than really is fair15 under the truth of fiber evidence and the16 total fiber evidence in this case.17 So I mean, I understand your18 position, and we may very well be able to19 get over it. You all are willing verbally20 to tell us the result. I think you clearly,21 in fairness, should be perfectly willing to22 show us the result. And when you do that,23 that would give us an opportunity to perhaps24 reconsider and answer the question.25 Would you all be willing to do

204 1 that, Bruce? 2 MR. LEVIN: I think that is 3 something we'd have -- I would have to 4 discuss with Chief Beckner. And I think you 5 can appreciate why, when we are talking about 6 physical evidence in an ongoing investigation, 7 which is not a filed case, that we are 8 reluctant to release reports. 9 MR. WOOD: Well, in fairness to10 John and Patsy, though, you are willing to11 state that these fibers, you believe, match,12 and it seems to me then you are not giving13 away anything by simply giving us the actual14 result. What did the forensic expert say? 15 What is the actual result? 16 If you are willing to say it17 verbally and characterize it, it seems to me18 you don't jeopardize anything in an ongoing19 investigation not filed by giving us the20 result and letting us see if, in fact, what21 the result says is consistent with the way22 you represent it today. It seems to me that23 would be fair and wouldn't hurt you in the24 slightest.25 MR. LEVIN: I understand your

Q. ....we believe the fibers 6 from her jacket were found in the paint 7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found 8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket 9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the 10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and 11 the question is, can she explain to us how 12 those fibers appeared in those places that 13 are associated with her daughter's death.

I am not Patsy - I am not Lin - but I have the answer.

Patsy owned the jacket for some time - she wore it in the house, in the car - and while she did not wear it while actually painting, there is a good chance the coat was in the same room as the paint tray at some time. Fibers shed and get everywhere - there is no reason to act shocked when some of the fibers ended up in the paint tray.

Patsy had worn that jacket when she went to the Whites, may have worn it when she tucked JonBenét in bed - fibers could have transferred then from her to her daughter's clothes.

So we had fibers in a paint tray and possibly on JonBenét's clothes - - AND consider this: John went to bed after Patsy - and when he went to bed with Patsy, she was in bedclothes, not the jacket.

So let's say JonBenét was killed after John was in bed, asleep... does the BORG really think patsy got up, put on a jacket to bring her daughter to a very warm and humid basement to kill her? (Yes, the basement near that heater is VERY warm and humid - - not cool - - no one would grab a jacket to go there. I have been there - - I know that to be a fact - - and so does LE.)

I think it is far more likely that the killer decided to take a pantbrush from the paint tray to make a handle for his garotte - and when he grabbed that brush, fibers adhered to his hand - - and those fibers, from the intruder's hand, transferred to the ligature and duct tape.

Could also be that the fibers were simply on JonBenét from when her mother tucked her in bed - - and again, adhered to the killer's hands and been transferred when he fashioned the ligature, when he put the duct tape on JonBenet's face.

Or, a much simpler explanation would be the red fibers and black fibers came from clothing the killer wore. I'm sure they did not test any other suspect's clothing. What, based on this investigation so far, would make us think they had?

1 MR. WOOD: And I think what we2 will probably find, more likely than not, is3 when we look at your test results, we will4 find that there was -- there were fibers5 that were consistent with or similar to6 fibers that you believe were found on Patsy's7 sweater or jacket.8 I think we will also find, if you9 put all of the information out there, that10 there were an extraordinary number of fibers11 that are not, in fact, in any way similar to12 any item associated with Patsy Ramsey on13 these very items.

That's the crux of the situation. To narrow in on the Ramseys about fibers that would normally be in the home and on their child and ignore the evidence of fibers they can't seem to match with anything they found in the house doesn't give the true picture for the record. All the fibers taken together have to be considered before making a determination about parental involvment or intruder. The fibers, taken together with the other evidence they have, has to be taken into consideration as well. All they had to do, as suggested by Lin, is ask Patsy if she had been near the paint tray with her jacket. They didn't want to do that, though, even after considering the question through lunch. It looks like they want to make a record that the fibers ARE from the red, black and gray jacket and that there is something sinister about that fact. Lin did a good job here. It would be sooo easy to say something that could be used against a person when they are sitting in the hot seat like this. Better to not even begin to go there. It could too easily skew the true picture of what happened to start addressing a skewed representation of the case.

It would have been better to say something like, "Look, Patsy, we have a lot fibers from the crime scene. Some of them look like they may have come from yours and John's clothing you wore that day, and some of them we have no source for at all. We need to find out if the fibers really are from you guys or from someone as yet unknown. Can you remember if you were near the paint tray and Jonbenet's blanket?"

That would have been a fair question and shown a spirit of fairness in the interview. That's all John and Patsy wanted.

205 3 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Mrs. Ramsey, your 4 son Burke, when he was attending grammar 5 school in Boulder, there was a weekly sort 6 of report that was sent by the teacher to 7 the parents. Do you recall that? 8 A. Vaguely. 9 Q. And you were, as a parent, given10 the opportunity or asked to provide some11 input or response to teacher's little report12 that was sent out once a week. Do you13 remember doing that? The Friday folder I14 think is what --15 A. Oh, Friday folder, yeah, I16 remember the Friday folder.17 Q. Okay. Up until the murder of18 your daughter, your, as a parent, your19 response in the Friday folder was always20 handwritten. Following the death of your21 daughter, your responses were always typed.22 Can you explain why you changed that?23 A. I didn't -- I wasn't aware that24 they were typed.25 MR. WOOD: Do you have any that

206 1 you can let her look at? 2 THE WITNESS: Do you have any of 3 those? 4 MR. LEVIN: I don't think we have 5 any in the computer. 6 MR. KANE: Not in the computer. 7 MR. LEVIN: No, no, we don't have 8 those. 9 MR. WOOD: Are you representing10 that every one afterwards was in fact typed?11 MR. KANE: That is what Burke's12 teacher has told us.13 MR. WOOD: Do you have them, the14 actual reports?15 MR. KANE: We certainly don't16 have them here. I am not sure if we have17 them.18 MR. WOOD: Well, I --19 THE WITNESS: I don't ever20 remember -- I mean, I don't have any21 recollection of ever typing anything in the22 Friday folder, but --23 MR. WOOD: I mean, if we can see24 them somewhere down the road, that might help25 refresh and give us some indication of an

207 1 explanation if they, in fact, are as you say 2 or as his teacher says. 3 Q. (By Mr. Levin) So I am assuming, 4 Mrs. Ramsey, then the answer to my question, 5 which was, can you explain why the change, 6 you can't offer one because you don't recall 7 the change occurring -- 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. -- as you sit here today?10 A. Right.

I don't know if this is true or what it could mean even if it was true. How does any of this help find JonBenét's killer?

I think they were trying to say that Patsy took certain evasive steps after the murder to try and hide the fact that she wrote the RN. I think it is pretty clear what direction the "interviews" were taking.

If they were typed, I would guess they were typed by a friend, perhaps Susan Stein. Based on Patsy's emotional state following the murder of JonBenet, I'm sure she was not functioning and able to take care of regular, normally routine things. Then again, John might have had his secretary type them or he may have typed them himself.

I never asked, but I think it might be that Susan Stine took over those responsibilities and typed the letters just to avoid any questions about the different handwriting. I mean, really, why does this look guilty? Patsy was giving the cops more and more handwriting samples and signing all kinds of releases so they could get handwriing samples from the doctor's office, the school, pageant applications and so on. Patsy wasn't worried about hiding her handwriting at all.

exchange. If they're so sure of the fibers, then why don't they produce the reports? For all we know, they found red and black fibers---consistent with, might just be the color. What other fibers did they find? How many of the red and black fibers were found, in comparison with other fibers that could not be matched to anything in the house?

There are many feasible explanations for fibers that MIGHT be consistent with Patsy's red/black/grey jacket.

Patsy said the paint tote was kept in the Butler's Pantry. She may have come in from outdoors (at some point prior to Dec 26th) and removed the jacket and laid it over the paint tote on the counter before getting around to hanging it up.

She might have come in and "hung" it over the back of a chair where it draped over the paint tote (if it was on the floor). Who knows if the red fibers even came from her jacket and who knows how they might have got there?

The questioning has borne no fruit IMO and they know there is no way for it to bear fruit. The fibers CANNOT match (too common) and if it was their "plan" to frighten one or both of the Ramseys by implying they were building evidence against one or both of them, they failed.

I don't believe the fibers are from Patsy's jacket, however, nor do I believe they are from any item of her clothing. There is a lot of fiber evidence and hair/fur evidence and they need to get off their flat butts and find a REAL explanation for them.

They went from "identical" with the fibers to "we believe" are the fibers. They are so obvious with their bluffing. I suggest you can take them up on any offers of a game of poker. As the "ante" goes up, their hesitancy will be apparent.

Lin is not being obstructive at all. He is alert to their "game" and protecting his clients.

So, we are looking for a sadistic 27 year-old male, with pedophilic tendencies, wearing size 9 HI-Tec boots, a red sweater, tan gloves, black coat with animal fur trim and some stray beaver hairs in the pocket, carrying a back pack with a stun gun, black duct tape, a length of cord, a knife, a head-bashing weapon, break-in tools, a flashlight, and a few movie cassettes.

Margoo posted: >They went from "identical" with the fibers to "we believe" >are the fibers. They are so obvious with their bluffing. I >suggest you can take them up on any offers of a game of >poker. As the "ante" goes up, their hesitancy will be >apparent. >>Lin is not being obstructive at all. He is alert to their >"game" and protecting his clients.

And it worked - - K&C no longer control the case, we have a special investigator on board, and the DA has issued a ststement that says, "the weight of the evidence is more consistent with a theory that an intruder murdered JonBenet than it is with a theory that Mrs. Ramsey did so."

>exchange. If they're so sure of the fibers, then why don't >they produce the reports? For all we know, they found red >and black fibers---consistent with, might just be the color. > What other fibers did they find? How many of the red and >black fibers were found, in comparison with other fibers >that could not be matched to anything in the house?

It sounds like they would not produce the reports because there is information that could be exculpatory to the Ramseys in them. They weren't about to provide them with anything they could use in preparation for a defense. Wouldn't you just love to see those reports?

I got the feeling that perhaps Wood HAD seen the reports and KNEW what was in them, that's why he was on the winning side of the argument. Attorneys usually don't ask a question unless they already know the answer.

of the clothes she had on that night. If she had anything to do with the crime, then why wouldn't she have gotten rid of the jacket? And why would she put back part of the broken brush....not to mention the writing pad for the police to find them?

How many fibers could have gotten transferred, even by the perp into the paint tray? Someone just reaching into it to pick up the paint brush wouldn't drop that many, would they? And where did they find the fibers? Floating around on top---or on the bottom under some of the other stuff in it?

I think there's more to the fiber story....a lot we don't know about how many they found, compared with just some that could have been transfers?

I have been asked if I think the red fibers were from Patsy's jacket and I will say yes, I believe they were. I do not think our killer was wearing red - even if it was Christmas, I think our guy was not out looking for any attention - no red sweater, no red hat.

The fibers from my favorite sweater (we don't have much need for real coats here) are everywhere. I am sure they are on my bed where I toss the sweater before folding it and putting it away. I am sure the fibers are in the living room where I sit, the kitchen where I pass through to shut off lights and such on my way out. Those fibers are in the basement because I have gone there to say goodbye to the kids in the den. They are certainly in the car - - on both sides because sometimes I am the passenger. And that means they are also on the other people who have sat in my car - - Lord knows where those fibers end up.

There is nothing strange about those red fibers from Patsy's coat being in Patsy's paint tray.

I don't understand how that points to anyone as the killer - - whether it be family or friend or total stranger - - the killer was in the house and used the stick from the tray. No matter who that was, it seems the fibers were there already.

(It doesn't make sense that patsy went to bed, John followed, she was in her pajamas - - and then she would get up, dress, kill her daughter, then undress and go back to bed. Just makes no sense to me.)

The way it works, Jameson, is if those unsourced fibers, of which there are many, all become linked to one person who does not belong in the Ramsey home or in contact with JonBenet. Of course, those fibers must have something distinctive about them to distinguish them from other similar fibers.

Wayne Williams, the Atlanta Child Killer, was convicted largely on fiber evidence. Criminologist began noticing distinctive yellowish-green nylon fibers on the victims, along with violet acetate fibers. They were able to source the Y-G fibers to carpeting based on cross sections, distintive lobe patterns, coarseness and diameter. However, they could not pinpoint the manufacturer at that time.

After extensive research and investigation, they found the manufacturer to be Wellman Corporation and the nylon product was known as 181B. Wellman sold this form of yarn to West Point Pepperell. WPP used the yarn in its Luxaire line, and wove a carpet called, "English Olive" that was sold in limited quantities in the Atlanta area.

Statistics showed that of the yardage sold in the Atlanta area, only 82 twelve X fifteen rooms could be expected to have this carpet in the entire state of Georgia. For the metro area of Atlanta, the stats fell to 1 in 7,792 housing units having a similar carpet. Given that the carpeting was eleven years old, and many homes would have replaced it, the odds fell further.

In all, twenty-eight different fibers were found on one or more victims and they were consistent with nineteen different items in the Williams home.

"On some victims we found as many as ten fibers that could be directly related to Williams' home or a car he had in his possession at the time of the murder. The chances that those ten fibers could have come from a place other than Williams' home are just about impossible."

"The combination of more than 28 different fiber types would not be considered so significant if they were primarily common fiber types. In fact, there is only 1 light green cotton fiber of the 28 that might be considered common. This cotton fiber was blended with acetate fibers in Williams' bedspread. Light green cotton fibers removed from many victims were not consistent or compared unless they were physically intermingled with violet acetate fibers which were consistent with originating from the bedspread. It should be noted that a combination of cotton and acetate fibers blended together in a single textile material as in the bedspread, is in itself uncommon." Special Agent, Harold Deadmand, FBI Microscopic Analysis Unit

I say check the scarf the Ramsey's gave to Bill McReynolds for Christmas 1996. It seems to have all the colors. Remember, he said they gave it to him and said he was now "part of their family." It would be like him to think since he was now "family" he could enter their house and NOT be an intruder. It was also the scarf he so boldly wore in the photo of himself and Janet. Yeah, for sure, check that scarf!